Opinions Jan. 17, 2013

January 17, 2013
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Daniel Brewington v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Reverses convictions and sentences for intimidation of Dr. Edward Connor and intimidation of Heidi Humphrey and remands with instructions to vacate, which does not alter Daniel Brewington’s aggregate sentence. Affirms conviction for intimidation of Judge James Humphrey and for attempted obstruction of justice relating to Connor. Affirms in all other respects.

Steven A. Ballaban v. Bloomington Jewish Community, Inc., a/k/a Congregation Beth Shalom, Paul Eisenberg, Judith Rose, Sarah Wasserman, Lynne Foster Shifriss, and Roberta "Didi" Kerler
Civil tort. Affirms denial of Ballaban’s motion to correct error and the grant of summary judgment in favor of the Bloomington Jewish Community Inc. and other appellees on his complaint after he was fired as rabbi for Beth Shalom. Finds evidence supporting the ruling that the ministerial exception applies. Denies appellees’ request for attorney fees. Judges Vaidik and Bailey concur in result in separate opinions.  

Kyle W. Dixon v. Ara J. Dixon
Domestic relation. Affirms order granting the notice of intent to relocate filed by Ara Dixon. The mother’s intent to relocate was made in good faith and not in haste, and father would be able to maintain virtually the same parenting time schedule.

Marilyn Carter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions for Class A misdemeanors resisting law enforcement and battery.

B.B., Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Juvenile.  Affirms adjudication as a delinquent for having committed what would be Class A misdemeanor cruelty to an animal if committed by an adult.

Jeff Clade v. Hunt Construction Group, Inc. (NFP)
Civil tort.  Grants rehearing to clarify original opinion and affirms, in which the Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for Hunt on a negligence claim. Judge Riley would deny rehearing.

Steven Newville v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms Class A felony conviction of attempted rape.

Garrick P. Twiford, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.